AB accused for 3 instances of sexual assualt & rape against 1 woman. Lawsuit filed against him

[TheFunPolice]

I get the sense that this is all falling apart

 

 

[Rob's House]

2 minutes ago, KD in CA said:

 

What if I just think Brown is an a--hole and want to see him suffer?

That's different.

[unbillievable]

Just now, TheFunPolice said:

I get the sense that this is all falling apart

 

 

THe lawsuit or Brown's football career?

[Reed83HOF]

4 minutes ago, YoloinOhio said:

There is a child endangerment issue too? 

 

 

[dubs]

4 minutes ago, SectionC3 said:

 

 

No armchair here. 

 

Ladies and Gentlemen, Long Island Medium is in the house!!

 

ps - just busting your balls or otherwise depending on your gender assigned at birth 

Edited September 11, 2019 by dubs

[Cripple Creek]

6 minutes ago, unbillievable said:

To everyone complaining that we need to follow some kind of protocol when discussing this, like "innocence" or "reasonable doubt"

 

This thread is literally a court of public opinion...

You blew my mind!

 

[Hapless Bills Fan]

8 minutes ago, Reed83HOF said:

 

 

Also, for those of us who wondered if the incident had been reported to whatever police had jurisdiction, the answer per this would be: "No"

 

Just now, Cripple Creek said:

You blew my mind!

 

An....interesting...... choice of words given the topic here

[YoloinOhio]

1 minute ago, Hapless Bills Fan said:

 

Also, for those of us who wondered if the incident had been reported to whatever police had jurisdiction, the answer per this would be: "No"

 

This is just regarding the one incident that took place in Pittsburgh 

[stevewin]

4 minutes ago, Hapless Bills Fan said:

 

 hide raw shrimp in his curtain rods. 

Is this a thing?

[unbillievable]

I believe that Antonio Brown should not play this season because of what he did to the Raiders... and firmly believe he is a d-bag...

 

...but this woman is clearly lying.

 

 

[whatdrought]

13 minutes ago, GoBills808 said:

 

In the instances you gave I believe the standard you're referring to is a 'reasonable suspicion', which is a lower standard of proof than probable cause. 

 

Man, you’re confusing my brain. ?

 

this: https://www.law.cornell.edu/wex/probable_cause

 

to me indicates that PC has more to do with the arresting side, not indicting and trial. 

[Hapless Bills Fan]

2 minutes ago, stevewin said:

Is this a thing?

 

I sit corrected, it's shrimp dipped in caviar.  Old joke.  But I'd imagine raw shrimp would work, too.

 

https://mythologystories.wordpress.com/2013/01/22/smelly-house/

[BuffaloHokie13]

1 minute ago, whatdrought said:

 

Man, you’re confusing my brain. ?

 

this: https://www.law.cornell.edu/wex/probable_cause

 

to me indicates that PC has more to do with the arresting side, not indicting and trial. 

Yeah. I'm pretty sure probable cause is almost entirely limited to arrests, limited detainment and search warrants 

[wppete]

What are the odds something else completely unrelated to this case comes up regarding AB this week???? I say 95% something will happen. 

[Cripple Creek]

8 minutes ago, Hapless Bills Fan said:

 

An....interesting...... choice of words given the topic here

& one that I’m disappointed to say never occurred to me!

[Hapless Bills Fan]

1 minute ago, wppete said:

What are the odds something else completely unrelated to this case comes up regarding AB this week???? I say 95% something will happen. 

 

I would not take this bet.

7 minutes ago, YoloinOhio said:

This is just regarding the one incident that took place in Pittsburgh 

 

I sit corrected again.

[SectionC3]

8 minutes ago, dubs said:

 

Ladies and Gentlemen, Long Island Medium is in the house!!

 

ps - just busting your balls or otherwise depending on your gender assigned at birth 

 

 

You can tell I’m a lawyer based on this response:

 

Your reference to “armchair lawyers and psychics” is ambiguous.  It’s unclear whether you meant “psychics” and “armchair lawyers,” or “armchair psychics” and “armchair lawyers.”  Applying the rule that an ambiguity (in this instance, in a message board post) must be construed against the drafter, my response in no way can be deemed to have suggested that I am a psychic inasmuch as your “armchair” reference could have pertained only to the question whether I have earned/lucked into a law degree and licensure to a state bar.  

 

(And, for what it’s worth, I don’t believe in psychics.) 

 

 

[starrymessenger]

7 minutes ago, SectionC3 said:

 

I think you’re looking for “corroborating” instead of “circumstantial.”  E.g., evidence of physical trauma to the victim would be direct evidence of the rape and corroborate a victim’s testimony as to a rape.  

 

The corroborating evidence rule applies to accomplice testimony and confessions.  Testimony of a victim, standing alone, is legally sufficient to convict in a sexual abuse/sexual assault case.  That said, prosecutors are disinclined to bring a case to a grand jury (other than perhaps a child sexual abuse case) in the absence of corroborating evidence.  

 

So, technically, this case could be brought on the testimony of the victim alone.  But I don’t think that will be an issue because we have the text message exchanges that corroborate at least the contention that sexual intercourse occurred.  How that effects the forcible penetration element of the crime lies in the eye of the beholder, I suppose. 

 

Thank you. Whether you call it circumstantial or corroborative evidence, I confess to being surprised that a conviction can occur solely on the basis of the complainant's affirmations. The reason is that I have a hard time regarding such assertions as constituting evidence as such and, if that is correct, it would follow that a criminal conviction cannot proceed in the absence of evidence. Now maybe that's where I'm wrong. Maybe the complainant's allegations are in criminal law and in procedure regarded as evidence albeit rarely, if ever, of sufficient weight to displace the legal presumption of innocence.

[SectionC3]

7 minutes ago, whatdrought said:

 

Man, you’re confusing my brain. ?

 

this: https://www.law.cornell.edu/wex/probable_cause

 

to me indicates that PC has more to do with the arresting side, not indicting and trial. 

 

Basically correct.  Probable cause to believe a crime has been committed is the threshold for arrest and (I believe) charge by complaint.  The threshold for an indictment — which must supersede a complaint, at least in NYS, is legally sufficient evidence.

[Reed83HOF]

Since this got zero responses on the previous page and a post after it did: This is the accuser (from what I can gather) in a video with AB

 

Does this look like the Brother-Sister relationship they had in her lawsuit?

Edited September 11, 2019 by Reed83HOF

[SectionC3]

1 minute ago, starrymessenger said:

 

Thank you. Whether you call it circumstantial or corroborative evidence, I confess to being surprised that a conviction can occur solely on the basis of the complainant's affirmations. The reason is that I have a hard time regarding such assertions as constituting evidence as such and, if that is correct, it would follow that a criminal conviction cannot proceed in the absence of evidence. Now maybe that's where I'm wrong. Maybe the complainant's allegations are in criminal law and in procedure regarded as evidence albeit rarely, if ever, of sufficient weight to displace the legal presumption of innocence.

 

The allegations themselves (e.g., charges levied in an indictment or in a complaint) aren’t evidence, but the sworn testimony in open court with respect to the events giving rise to the allegations is evidence.  

[whatdrought]

2 minutes ago, Reed83HOF said:

Since this got zero responses on the previous page and a post after it did: This is the accuser (from what I can gather) in a video with AB

 

Does this look like the Brother-Sister relationship they had in her lawsuit?

 

That’s pretty damning, IMO.

[Kelly the Dog]

1 minute ago, whatdrought said:

 

That’s pretty damning, IMO.

I'm confused. What does that show?

[whatdrought]

Just now, Kelly the Dog said:

I'm confused. What does that show?

 

Well, my very limited understanding is that she insisted there was no relationship- this shows them in flirtatious behavior and in bed together. If she is claiming there was nothing consensual, this might indicate otherwise. - I could be way off on that. 

[YoloinOhio]

10 minutes ago, whatdrought said:

 

That’s pretty damning, IMO.

In what way? He’s not entitled to do what he did without her consent, whether they are dating or what. 

 

Edit - I see now she says they never dated 

Edited September 11, 2019 by YoloinOhio

[whatdrought]

Just now, YoloinOhio said:

In what way? He’s not entitled to do what he did without her consent, whether they are dating or what. 

 

I agree, obviously, but I thought her argument was there was nothing consensual? (I haven’t read everything so ignore me if I’m 100% off base)

[YoloinOhio]

6 minutes ago, whatdrought said:

 

Well, my very limited understanding is that she insisted there was no relationship- this shows them in flirtatious behavior and in bed together. If she is claiming there was nothing consensual, this might indicate otherwise. - I could be way off on that. 

I understood it that they did have an off and on thing going on but maybe not 

5 minutes ago, whatdrought said:

 

I agree, obviously, but I thought her argument was there was nothing consensual? (I haven’t read everything so ignore me if I’m 100% off base)

I need to read her accusations again 

edit - you are correct. She says they never dated or had a sexual relationship 

Edited September 11, 2019 by YoloinOhio

[GoBills808]

8 minutes ago, SectionC3 said:

 

Basically correct.  Probable cause to believe a crime has been committed is the threshold for arrest and (I believe) charge by complaint.  The threshold for an indictment — which must supersede a complaint, at least in NYS, is legally sufficient evidence.

 

I was under the impression that 'probable cause', broadly defined, meets the threshold for both arrest and indictment. 

[uticaclub]

AB is a tool which should be suspended based on his actions in Oakland. What this lady is doing is awful and should be prosecuted to the full extend of the law. Fake rape chargers are terrible and make actual rape claims unbelievable

[StHustle]

15 minutes ago, YoloinOhio said:

In what way? He’s not entitled to do what he did without her consent, whether they are dating or what. 

 

................ [Post Moderated for content]

[Hapless Bills Fan]

 

 

 

1 hour ago, uticaclub said:

AB is a tool which should be suspended based on his actions in Oakland. What this lady is doing is awful and should be prosecuted to the full extend of the law. Fake rape chargers are terrible and make actual rape claims unbelievable

 

I thought we weren't supposed to rush to judgement based upon what's reported in the media?

[jimmy10]

1 hour ago, StHustle said:

[moderated for content]

 

TSW is not your personal erotica site. 

[uticaclub]

1 minute ago, Hapless Bills Fan said:

I thought we weren't supposed to rush to judgement based upon what's reported in the media?

True, I just have a hard time believing he assaulted her three separate times.  Fool me once...

[4merper4mer]

1 hour ago, StHustle said:

[moderated for content}

She is sleep?

[stevewin]

10 minutes ago, Hapless Bills Fan said:

 

I sit corrected, it's shrimp dipped in caviar.  Old joke.  But I'd imagine raw shrimp would work, too.

 

https://mythologystories.wordpress.com/2013/01/22/smelly-house/

Thanks - it all makes sense now

 

It is a good thing the divorce settlement didn't have a clause where "spouse represents & warrants there aren't any existing circumstances when signed"

[Moose]

18 hours ago, die hard bills fan said:

Not that I like the guy in anyway but rember innocence before guilt and being a jackass football star makes him a more appealing target.

 

I agree - everyone, even a dumba$$, deserves their day in court to face their accuser. Still, it's always nice when Satan's Team attracts some negative karma. Sooner or later that "contract" will come due and the soul harvest will commence. 

[BurpleBull]

1 hour ago, John from Riverside said:

Pray it never happens to someone you actually care about then

 

Rather, I'll just hope that no female I know would be so stupid to place herself in the same precarious position, that this lady suggests she found herself in with AB, by her own doing.

[Bubba Gump]

Michael Kay is blasting Kraft and the Patriots on his show right now. He said that if AB did write those emails and talking to another person like that, he has serious mental problems. He said AB and the Pats are a disgrace and that Kraft should be ashamed of himself for not cutting Brown if he did indeed write those emails. Says they will do anything to win another SB. Those emails are disgusting and if the Pats do nothing, they are disgusting as well. He also said Brady is nuts for letting him stay in his house with his wife and daughter as AB obviously has no morals or respect for any other human being.

[Hapless Bills Fan]

5 minutes ago, Bubba Gump said:

Michael Kay is blasting Kraft and the Patriots on his show right now. He said that if AB did write those emails and talking to another person like that, he has serious mental problems. He said AB and the Pats are a disgrace and that Kraft should be ashamed of himself for not cutting Brown if he did indeed write those emails. Says they will do anything to win another SB. Those emails are disgusting and if the Pats do nothing, they are disgusting as well. He also said Brady is nuts for letting him stay in his house with his wife and daughter as AB obviously has no morals or respect for any other human being.

[Doc]

44 minutes ago, SectionC3 said:

You can tell I’m a lawyer based on this response:

 

Your reference to “armchair lawyers and psychics” is ambiguous.  It’s unclear whether you meant “psychics” and “armchair lawyers,” or “armchair psychics” and “armchair lawyers.”  Applying the rule that an ambiguity (in this instance, in a message board post) must be construed against the drafter, my response in no way can be deemed to have suggested that I am a psychic inasmuch as your “armchair” reference could have pertained only to the question whether I have earned/lucked into a law degree and licensure to a state bar.  

 

(And, for what it’s worth, I don’t believe in psychics.) 

 

 

I knew you were going to say that.